Mitigating climate change requires tough decisions. But how do you arrive at a good decision? In his book Engaged Decision Making, professor Etiënne Rouwette discusses methods that can help. 'At Macron's climate convention, there was too little focus.'
In organisations, it is usually teams that are responsible for big decisions. Decisions by these teams turn out wrong in three out of four cases, research shows. 'The options chosen are not implemented or do not solve the problem,' says Etiënne Rouwette, professor of Research and Intervention Methodology at the department of Business Administration. 'That wrong approach essentially amounts to a top-down approach. Not all people are allowed to participate in the decision. It then turns out that as a result, not all effects have been considered and there is often backlash from those who have not been heard.' An example of this in politics is the nitrogen map published by the Dutch government in 2022. It showed how much nitrogen reduction was needed for each area. 'Very top-down. It is not strange that the agriculture sector took action against that.'
Sticking to own ideas
When people do get involved, they can share their knowledge and multiple perspectives are considered. Still, being involved does not automatically ensure good results. Brainstorming happens a lot, but all you get is a wall full of ideas. You can cluster those ideas and prioritise them with stickers. But are you then on the same page? By the word "quality" I can mean something very different from you. In a brainstorm, you won't find out.' That way, people easily stick to their own preconceptions and ideas, is Rouwette's experience. In the biggest task of our time, tackling climate change, something completely different will be needed. 'Brainstorming alone is not going to save the world. The distance between a loose list of ideas and deciding what to do is too great. People and organisations need to get a better grip on the matter in order to make a move.'
